No, in Aviation consumer's own words.

They clearly indicate that the main capability of having an on board
altimeter is a major step above the monroy. Which I agree with
completely after having flown with both the Monroy and the
Trafficscope. The monroy had many instances where it either did not
get the correct altitude, or didn't know what altitude to use if any.
Having someone hit IDENT in a busy ATC enviorment is absolutely nuts,
as Aviation Consumer points out as well.

The answer to the altitude issues with the monroy unit is; watch for
the display, mess with the transponder, pester ATC with a spurious
IDENT, and hope it fixes the problem (which it didn't for Aviation
Consumer)

The Trafficscope solution to this problem is; Don't worry about it,
the on board altimeter solves it for you.


But I understand your myopia in your desire to market the monroy. But
what you are trying to portray is that a Cessna 150 is a better
aircraft because it is smaller, and cheaper than a C-421.

"If that capability is important to you......."

A C-150 costs less because it doesn't have the "capabilities" that a
Twin Cessna 421 has.











Thomas Borchert wrote in message ...
BHelman,

it obviously makes sense to have
a more capable device like the Trafficscope, vs. a cheaper, less
capable like the monroy.


To you. Not to Aviation Consumer. In fact, they ask if all those
"capabilities" are really useful in practice.